posted by alexander drewniak in
AT&T,
Common Short Code Administration,
DailyWireless,
Free Press,
Jeffrey Nelson,
Net Neutrality,
Public Knowledge,
Robert Poe,
SMS,
Verizon,
VoIP-News,
blog,
calls,
cheap,
disruption,
federal communications commission,
international,
mobile,
mvoip,
price,
telecom cartels,
text message,
voip
Welcome all Verizon and AT&T customers!
That probably sounds a bit odd coming from Rebtel these days. But yesterday Verizon and AT&T rolled out new plans that give U.S. customers unlimited airtime minutes for a flat fee of $100. And flat fee plans are music to our ears even if the carrier continues to block its customer SMS.
Unlimited airtime minutes means anyone who subscribes to one of these plans now has the ability to make unlimited free international calls to 39 countries around the world using Rebtel’s Smart Call system.
But even if they’re not willing to jump through the few hoops that make the international portion of call free, they can still take advantage of our super low-cost rates for calling any phone, anywhere in the world.
And eventually, we hope that Verizon will come to its senses and stop preventing its customers from sending standard SMS text messages to themselves and their friends if they contain local phone numbers issued by Rebtel.
Late last week I spoke with Robert Poe, a reporter for VoIP-News and DailyWireless about this issue. As any good reporter should do, Robert contacted Verizon after our call. Verizon (no surprise) denies that it is blocking SMS that their customers try to send to themselves or that their friends try to send to them from the Rebtel web site.
Robert declined Rebtel’s help to test our claims, which will make his findings all the more powerful when they come out. In the mean time, with the kind help of my comrade Fredrik Henning, I thought I’d take a minute to shed some light the mechanics of this problem and why Verizon is not telling the truth.
To be able to send SMS to people in U.S. from a system platform, not person to person, a short code number is required to identify the sender of the messages. Therefore every provider of messaging services has to apply for a dedicated or shared short code (a 5-6 digit number) from the Common Short Code Administration (CSCA), which Rebtel had done and received.
The reason for this bureaucracy is that the U.S. market applies interconnect charges differently than other countries. In the U.S. mobile recipients pay for incoming SMS. In contrast, people in Europe do not pay for incoming SMS because the operators in Europe are being paid by the originating operators to cover the cost of delivering the SMS to the recipient.
Rebtel wants its customers to be able to send SMS to their friends that are mobile subscribers in U.S. mobile networks. Rebtel wishes only to send SMS on behalf of the users, and not perform any unsolicited bulk messaging (a.k.a. SPAM or advertising).
So, despite what Verizon spokesman Jeffrey Nelson tells the press, every SMS sent from Rebtel’s system is sent on behalf of the users who have requested that Rebtel send SMS to their friends or to themselves.
But it doesn’t end here. To get a short code implemented in a U.S. mobile operators network a specification of traffic flow and commands has to be submitted to each operator for approval of the process of OPT-IN and OPT-OUT, insuring that the recipients really do wish to get charged for receiving SMS.
Rebtel provided its specification of this process and got it approved by some operators, but not all, namely, Verizon.
So the bottom line is we’ve played by the rules. Our specification follows all requirements to get a short code approved with regards to OPT-IN and OPT-OUT. Yet, Verizon refuses to approve it. What’s that about? Why is this allowed?
We think it’s now time for the industry to stand up to this bullying.
We think the CTIA the trade association “dedicated to expanding the wireless frontier needs to reprimand Verizon and demand they play by the rules.
And if that doesn’t work, then we think it really is time for the FCC to do something about Verizon and its blatant anti-competitive abuse of power.